The Television series Star Trek has inspired many technological advances, including the cell phone and language translators. One advancement we have yet to achieve is the transporter. Can it be possible, though? Let's first figure out how the Star Trek transporter works.
The transporter converts matter, such as a person, into energy. This energy is beamed to a target, where it materializes back into matter. Is this possible? Well, considering that we have determined that mass is directly correlated to energy, it could be physically possible. If E=Mc^2, then it takes a ton of mass just to make a small amount of energy! That could work with the transporter. The object would become a much smaller amount of energy that could be beamed to the desired location. It is mathematically possible. The question is can we make mass become energy?
If we move the mass particles at close enough to or at the speed of light, the particles could become energy. Perhaps to use this transporter, we have to accelerate an object to the speed of light and then shoot the energy to the target destination, where the energy will once again become mass due to slowing down. However, this process seems very shaky for a few reasons.
First of all, how do we know that the energy will realign in the correct position? If it takes all that mass just to make a small amount of energy, then it may not realign at all! It would have to return to the same particles, but the matter would probably be randomly scrambled!
Secondly, are we sure that the energy will once again become mass in the end? At such speeds, it could even become other particles! Is there any guarantee that we can get the energy to once again become mass?
Also, can anything survive such a transportation? Actually, it could work. When you look at any living thing, there are certain bodily functions that allow it to work. If we could figure out everything about the functions of the human body, we could better understand why things die and why they live. I think all of that depends on the brain. If we can figure out how the brain works, we could probably create life and resurrect the dead(not that I approve of such ideas).
The point is that if when the particles were put back together they made the exact same thing as they started out as, it should be a living thing because it would have all of the body parts in order, so why wouldn't it survive? It's an idea that I am sure many of you will criticize, but I think that it could be done. However, there must be a few conditions for it to work.
First of all, the start of the transportation must take place in a vacuum. If while accelerating the mass it slides across other mass of any type, the friction would kill a human or any living thing.
Secondly, the beaming must be precise to the quantum level. If that energy is given any opportunity to split, human is toast. Not that I wouldn't mind that. I think turning humans into toast would be fun. Great, now I'm hungry. Moving on.
Finally, we must know that the energy will once again become mass when it slows down. It won't slow down until it reaches an atmosphere of some sort, and if it does, it must become the same mass it was before.
There is one thing that is also easily forgotten. Just because something is the same mass doesn't mean it is going to be the same matter. Bricks and feathers can both have the same mass depending on the quantity of each material! I find that uncertainty to be quite scary.
In my opinion, it is possible to build a transporter, and with a greater understanding of our universe we may someday find ways to satisfy the conditions stated above. However, I wouldn't step on a transporter if I were you until many, many, many, many tests have been successfully completed with good results.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So it looks like transporting a human is out of the question. If an intelligent being (aka me) can't remember the arrangement of bones in a hand, how can we expect to randomly realign things, protons into atoms, atoms into molecules into compounds into... so on and so forth until somehow, miraculously, the man shimmers into shape before you? The chances are astronomical!
ReplyDeleteIn addition, how could we accelerate a mass, much less a living being, to light speed? That's, what, 299,792, 458 meters per second? Can you imagine a device that would do that, or, worse, stepping into one? In the few seconds it would take to get the machine to full power, you would already be halfway across the galaxy.
Although I adore Star Trek, the concept of the transporter is impractical. Perhaps it looked cool on screen, but I doubt we will be achieving it anytime soon... or ever.
I thought we already agreed that making anything go light speed was impossible except energy. But I do like the idea of human toast. To be optimistic, Humans have actually created life. Well, some guy took single amino acid and combined it with others to make proteins, and then someone else took the protien and developed it to make some primative form of a living being. Pretty cool.
ReplyDeleteSo if human can make new life, it seems possible to reconstruct old. Though it would be very difficult to make the energy and mass proportional to exactly the same relations as when it started, it is theoretically possible.
And even if it made Human toast, the transportation might have also created new life that will eat the toast. Atleast we would know they were natives to the Earth!!
Finally I would like to say that we are generally getting stuck on travelling at light speed being the best way to gain energy. The Guy that made the protiens used steam from boiled water as the energy source for the combination. Saying that, the answer might not lie in speed, but in heat. It sounds more dangerous, but I think it would do the same thing.
That might also help in the time travel debate--The time machine in "Back to the Future" was always covered in frost that was painful to the touch. That is because although it wasn't going light speed, thermal energy was used.
That makes me think that we might not have to go anywhere at all if the particles get so hot that they move independantly at light speed. That might not work for living beings though (or anything that you want to retain it's shape and chemical composition) because the particles would move around so much it would be nearly impossible for them to stop moving in the same spot they originated. Good thing we like new inventions and toast!!!!
OK this transporter deaal is very interesting. shannon, Your idea on giving objects energy is a good theory you would have to energize, HAHA, the object instanttainiously or you risk melting or frying an object. that includes humans. unfortunatly that would be vurtuly impossable in todays world because we cannot aply energy to particals with accuracy ,maybe we could use induction coils.of course it would also require an extream amount of energy, about the same amount that would be possible in an object, so to energize 1 kg of iron you would need ~32,400,000,000 Joules or more. i also think that we can tackle the despersant of particals and non alingnment problem which would turn objects into mush by using powerful electromagnets. these magnets will act as an alignment guide for the atoms so you don't end up with mush. Ok and so the part about the transporting an obgect is stil puzzleing me maby we can use magnets again.
ReplyDeleteI don't know.
dan, i have to disagree with your piont on energizing in a vacume because if you add energy to atoms and keep them aligned and you take away that energy it should be in the same form as it went in. counting that you energize at the proper energy and you inergize and deenergize instanttainiously.
The heat idea is an interesting concept. However, the heat as Aaron stated would have to be applied extremely quickly or else resulting in death. Again, this entire process depends on if life can work with all of the same materials. If we copied a human atom for atom, chemical for chemical, exactly, would it be able to live?
ReplyDeleteIf so, then we could momentarily kill the human, then bring it back to life at the end of the transportation.
Aaron, when I was talking about the vacuum I was referring to the speeding up method, not the heat method. The problem with accelerating an object in an atmosphere is the friction. With heat it's a different story.
Ok dan and i don't like that heat thing that my sister put i think mechanical energy other than thermal energy would be lot more practical. I see what you mean about the vacuum.
ReplyDeleteA combination between the two would probably work best as in "back to the future" so that you wouldn't have to do anything more than humanly possible.
ReplyDeleteTO the REAL question. Can something survive after being "Killed"?
I am not sure of that answer, but my oppinion which is rapidly changing says that if there is energy added, the chemical reactions that run off other energy triggers would go off(I don't know which ones they might be because we aren't certain about the brain's functions). After they are done and there is nothing left to react that part of human functioning would be dead forever. Sort of like a short circuit, but a sensory overload.
Howerver another part of me says that it is completely possible, because some frogs completely freeze and come back to "Life" the next spring. That is because the ice crystals are so small they don't puncture the cells. But the point being, the frogs live!!
well I am having to agree with shannon but I think that to transport a being that has any kind of memory would be impossible. seeing how we don't know how the brain works this transporter might just be a good mind wipe and delete everthing like wiping a computer.thus if you manage to get a transporter to work you might just have to transport inanamate objects like cargo.
ReplyDeleteWell, the thing about the frogs is do they actually die? Isn't that just a form of hibernation? The life form is still functioning during this period is it not?
ReplyDeleteI don't think that example really helps to answer the question. In this transporter we are changing mass into energy, basically destroying the life form because the energy is not "living" as far as we know.
I think that if we knew how the human brain worked we could resurrect life. We just need to find out all of the parts of such a complex organ and how they work together. In time I think the technology will be discovered to figure it out.
Once we have the correct information, we will know how to avoid sensory overloads.
I see your point Aaron, but if the brain's memory cells were still exactly the same at the end of the transport, shouldn't the life form have the same memory?
ReplyDeleteHey, I know I might have said this before, but a while ago someone had mentioned starting a philosophy blog. I'd be willing to work on that, if you guys would read and contribute. If you could say if you're interested in reading something like that, I'd be grateful.
ReplyDeleteDorothea, If you make a Philosophy blog tell me how to access it and I'll do it. Mr. Yonko might also help with that if we asked.
ReplyDeleteThere is a fundamental flaw with our great ideas. We can turn into energy and not be killed when we are reconstructed into matter, but how are we supposed to get from one point to the next. If we use a mix of speed and heat, we could end up in another galaxy, using just heat and we dissappeared and reappeared in the same spot. It could be solved using good conductors to transport the energy, but I fear that some of the energy will be left behind, or it would take part of the conductor with it. That messes up the end result. It appears to me that this is quite a problem and Transporting anything might be harder than it sounds.
If we use speed, we could have the energy travel through the vacuum until it reaches the target atmosphere. Once the energy reaches the atmosphere, it may slow down and return to matter.
ReplyDeleteIf we use heat, perhaps we can have a way to cool the energy into matter at the target of the transportation. We would probably then have to have specific end points for the transportation to work.
Yes, I agree that it is a big problem, and we need more information and some experimenting.